It’s worth digging out the actual numbers to see what that comparison really is.

Google was founded in 1998. The earliest revenue figure I can find is from 2001: just $86.4m. It’s safe to assume in 1998, Google’s revenue was zero or close to it. For FY2013, Google annouced revenues of $59.83bn. A staggering growth from 12 years prior.

Microsoft’s revenue for FY1997/98 was $14.48bn. For FY2013/14, it was $86.83bn – an increase of $72.35bn. That’s $12.52bn more than Google’s latest figures.

And for fun, let’s throw in Apple. 1998 was still three years before the release of the iPod. Apple recorded revenues of ‘just’ $5.94bn. That’s now grown to $170.91bn for FY2013/14 – more than Microsoft and Google combined.

While these figures tell us about past growth, it doesn’t tell you much about the future. Who would you rather be: Google, Microsoft or Apple?

Notes on revenue figures

Google’s financial year runs the same as the calendar year.

Microsoft’s financial year runs from July to June the following year.

Apple’s financial year runs from October to September the following year.

While this means the figures above aren’t quite a true like-for-like comparison, I don’t think it really matters.

Write a Comment

Reminds me of the argument Ben Thompson put forward here: http://stratechery.com/2014/peak-google/. Tech companies aren’t replaced, they’re eclipsed – the platforms they dominate don’t suddenly lose their value when a cool new disruptive platform emerges – IBM is still a very profitable company despite the emergence of Microsoft and the PC, Microsoft is still generating a tonne of revenue despite the emergence of Google and Search, and Google will still be generating tonnes of revenue from Search despite being eclipsed by Facebook’s dominance in mobile.